STATE AND BYLAWS

Evening Post, Volume CXXVII, Issue 29, 4 February 1939, Page 8

STATE AND BYLAWS

If the positions and responsibility had been reversed and if a nonLabour Government had erected the Social Security building in disregard of city bylaws, one can imagine what scorching condemnation would have come from some erstwhile Labour councillors. The temperate protests now made by the Mayor and the chairman of the Fire Board are amply justified. Both the Mayor and the chairman quite fairly pointed out that other temporary buildings had been erected by previous Governments and also, under permit, by private citizens, though the council in recent years has tightened up its control in this respect. But the Social Security building, from its position in relation to adjacent buildings, its material (at least in the construction stage), and its size, was probably more dangerous than any of the temporary structures that preceded it. The statement made by the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Semple) does not afford a sufficient excuse for disregarding city bylaws. Especially does this apply to the attempt to shift part of the blame by stating that "the previous Government had shamefully neglected the building of Government offices." After all, the temporary structure was being erected three years after the Coalition Government vacated office, and the present Government has the use of two very large buildings, Railways and Government Life, the former of which was begun under the previous Government. The important lesson of Thursday's , disastrous fire is, however, that no authority, even the Government, should set at naught the wise and necessary fire-prevention bylaws of the municipality. The Government is legally above the municipality in this I matter, but this freedom from control is warranted only by the assumption that the Government will do voiun- . tarily all, or more than, the bylaws demand. The immunity may legally { permit the Government to do less, . but morally it places it under an , obligation to do more and to set an example to private citizens. ( Fortunately the fire, though ~ disastrous, resulted in no loss of life; ! but the loss in property to the Government and private owners is , heavy enough to be an emphatic warning against. repetition of the

error. At this time of heavy building costs and shortage ot accommodation, any destruction of buildings by fire is a severe community loss, not lessened, though its incidence is changed, by insurance. Having regard to these facts the City Council may well support the chairman of the Fire Board in inquiring more particularly what type of temporary building lis to be erected on Aotea Quay,